It doesn't matter if it was Ray or whoever. The correct decision was made, stop your crying, you are looking more and more stupid each time you reply.
Deliberate rushed behind.
- Thread starter Glenn_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Grockadoc
Brownlow Medallist
- Jul 25, 2008
- 25,234
- 48,148
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Fighting Furies, Man Utd, Cavaliers
Yeah, a handball surrounded by a mass of players is different to being one of 3 or so players in a forward line that is extremely open with 5 meters of space on your direct opponent and not even looking for another option.
More pressure on Dusty's handball than that kick.
- Sep 21, 2004
- 46,548
- 52,865
- AFL Club
- GWS
Saying it looked deliberate is irrelevant. Players deliberately knock it across every game and its not paid.
The Hanley one was terrible. Players do that all the time, but this week it is deliberate.
The Hanley one was terrible. Players do that all the time, but this week it is deliberate.
hawkman
Hall of Famer
The Hanley one you would see at least 1 of them a game but that is the only one they have paid like that with a player running it through all year.
That's why there's a video of your own coach in the box saying "how's that f**king deliberate?".
Ray is a dickhead. A grandstanding dickhead. People with his type of personality shouldn't be umpires.
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,382
- 2,598
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
The "pressure" interpretation has always been problematic - how much pressure? If it's permissible to take a clearly deliberate action with the sole intent of getting the ball across the line when a player is nearby, the line between that and what will actually be penalised is too blurry... and so we end up with a rule that's practically never enforced: most of the frees given in '09 wouldn't be given today, despite the fact those were mostly (barring a few hiccoughs) correct calls (e.g., the first one given, against Daniel Pratt, who handballed it across the line after a play-on call on the kick-out with Matthew Lloyd coming at him). There's been some talk of changing the rule to be more like deliberate out-of-bounds, which would be even worse than what we have now, but stricter enforcement of the actual rule (not the "pressure" nonsense that has never made sense) is desirable, and this is a good example of the rule being correctly enforced.
Anyone who says the above belongs in the Bae with the flogs who congreate down there.
Fantastic decision to pay it. The Freo player had options and took the softest one of the lot. Deserved to get pinged and should be dropped for being a soft****.
Last edited:
I hate this game and the people that are taking it down this path.
Sure, blame the ump for applying the rules. I dislike Ray as much as anyone but the rule is there, a directive came from the afl to pay that this week and he did that. He cant win i guess.
I was against the deliberate over the boundary rule at the start but it has opened the game up resulting in more free flowing high scoring and less throw ins conjestion around the ruck etc. Dont be too closed minded i say
Get rid of the rule that says it is a free, but to compensate for it being too good an option, go back to having to wait for the flags to be waved. A caveat I'd be happy with is that the kick in must touch another player before you rush it again
Tactically, the rushed behind was always a last resort type of thing to stop a goal. With the free kick and the ability to play on without the forwards having time to set up a zone or man up; it is no longer a tactic of last resort but an attacking move.
Giving away a point, then having to wait to kick in, should make it a tactic of last resort again, and crucially, eliminate one of the interpretation type decisions we burden the umpires with.
Tactically, the rushed behind was always a last resort type of thing to stop a goal. With the free kick and the ability to play on without the forwards having time to set up a zone or man up; it is no longer a tactic of last resort but an attacking move.
Giving away a point, then having to wait to kick in, should make it a tactic of last resort again, and crucially, eliminate one of the interpretation type decisions we burden the umpires with.
The rushed behind rule was implemented to stop the old Brent Guerra type 'kick to myself and then slam it through for a point' scenarios from coming back into the game.
It was never intended to punish defenders for using the goal line to get them out of trouble when under pressure by an opponent. At least that was the case until some dickhead at head office decided to attempt to take another tactical aspect of the game out of it and replace it with chaos.
Basically, the entire game is slowly having all of the tactical aspects removed from it by the powers that be in favour of "letting the game flow".
The result?
Flooding. It's in every game, every week, everywhere. And it's sickening. Better to have 18 players behind the ball and then attempt to rebound it than allow for space in the forward line for the opposition to maybe cut through and score.
I now regularly see defenders pick the ball up 2m from the goal line with 4 opponents around them and rather than turn around and pop it through for a behind tactically to release some pressure and open it up they're scared to do it so they end up punting it under pressure for no good reason and turning it over stupidly.
It's horrid.
Every time some buffoon comes up with an idea to "open the game up" the coaches respond by finding new ways to lock it down. And as their tactical tools continue to be stripped from them they're forced to turn AFL games into under-10s.
F**k that.
It was never intended to punish defenders for using the goal line to get them out of trouble when under pressure by an opponent. At least that was the case until some dickhead at head office decided to attempt to take another tactical aspect of the game out of it and replace it with chaos.
Basically, the entire game is slowly having all of the tactical aspects removed from it by the powers that be in favour of "letting the game flow".
The result?
Flooding. It's in every game, every week, everywhere. And it's sickening. Better to have 18 players behind the ball and then attempt to rebound it than allow for space in the forward line for the opposition to maybe cut through and score.
I now regularly see defenders pick the ball up 2m from the goal line with 4 opponents around them and rather than turn around and pop it through for a behind tactically to release some pressure and open it up they're scared to do it so they end up punting it under pressure for no good reason and turning it over stupidly.
It's horrid.
Every time some buffoon comes up with an idea to "open the game up" the coaches respond by finding new ways to lock it down. And as their tactical tools continue to be stripped from them they're forced to turn AFL games into under-10s.
F**k that.
Last edited:
Worse yet, I'm just listening now and the players and coaches are all asking why they weren't told of a stricter interpretation of this rule before the weekend came around.
This league is run by monkeys. It's farcical.
This league is run by monkeys. It's farcical.
- Banned
- #39
Can the umpires please just come out and say which rule they are enforcing this week?
It would make it easier for the players if they knew what the rule of the week was.
It would make it easier for the players if they knew what the rule of the week was.
- Banned
- #40
Agree that it should have been paid, but I still agree with the post you're replying to.
The only reason Ray paid that was because he is, in fact, a grandstanding dickhead. He does the same with deliberate out of bounds around the ground.
Just laps up the crowd before paying the decision.
I would like to see these deliberates get paid, however, I would like the umpire to just s**t his mouth and do his job and not play up to the crowd.
There must be a KPI stating that any stoppage is to be minimised.
This leads to: messy mauls where the umpire doesn't want to bounce.
Messy play because players cannot do anything as they are being held, pushed in the back, tackled illegally.
Marks not being paid. This is the worst. Reasonable control is not good enough any more. But the game must not stop, the AFL would rather it continue, even if it is a mess
However it's perfectly fine to * a leading forward any way you can. There's hardly any punishment any more. Chopping the arms, what happened to that rule?
- Feb 16, 2012
- 5,855
- 10,726
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Portland Trailblazers
Hardwick's reaction was immediately after it was rushed and before the decision was made. I assumed he was saying "hey, that's exactly what the AFL told us we couldn't do this week!"
Makes a pleasant change to not be the team that forgot to read the memo for a change.
Agree on this bit though.
This whole situation was brought to a head by WCE's Eric Mackenzie the previous week.
I wonder how the umpires would adjudicate this Mackenzie effort a couple of years ago.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-12/bizarre-rushed-behind
My favourite Mackenzie effort is this one
Benefit of the doubt...maybe.
I wonder how the umpires would adjudicate this Mackenzie effort a couple of years ago.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-12/bizarre-rushed-behind
My favourite Mackenzie effort is this one
Benefit of the doubt...maybe.
Deliberate rushing a behind ??
Deliberate out of bounds ??
* me dead, this game is being over-officiated way more than it needs to be.
Deliberate out of bounds ??
* me dead, this game is being over-officiated way more than it needs to be.
Hate this rule. No idea on what constitutes 'pressure' and what is not. The game survived for 100 years without this. You can't umpire on a player's mindset - they're all boofheads, anyway. The players aren't too smart, either.
I'm waiting for the time when the ball is bouncing around near the point post with 10 seconds to go. The defending side are leading by 3 points, so they want to rush a behind and try to hold possession from the kick-in. The attacking side (who are trailling by 3 points) would like the ball to go out of bounds, so as to keep the ball in the attacking area and try a set play from the throw-in.
So you'll have one side trying to rush a behind deliberately, and one side trying to force the ball out of play deliberately. Free kicks all round!!!!
I'm waiting for the time when the ball is bouncing around near the point post with 10 seconds to go. The defending side are leading by 3 points, so they want to rush a behind and try to hold possession from the kick-in. The attacking side (who are trailling by 3 points) would like the ball to go out of bounds, so as to keep the ball in the attacking area and try a set play from the throw-in.
So you'll have one side trying to rush a behind deliberately, and one side trying to force the ball out of play deliberately. Free kicks all round!!!!
- Aug 17, 2006
- 23,307
- 21,607
- AFL Club
- Geelong
It feels like I've been going on about this for over five years. That they could solve this so easily and apparently choose not to drives me insane. Surely we can't be the only people that realise that this only became a problem once the full back no longer had to wait for the flags to be waved before kicking the ball out and that it could similarly be fixed by getting rid of that advantage if the defensive team chooses to take it over the line.
You wouldn't have to have deliberate or not deliberate/under pressure or whatever it is. Just any time the ball is put over the line by a player from the defending team, they have to wait to bring the ball back in.
The Hanley one was correct. He ran both ways and had plenty of room between him and Nathan Jones but decided after refusing to dispose of the footy to run over the line still having a lot of room between his nearest opponent.
gavaniacono
Cancelled
If Freo players feel pressure that easily, therein lies a problem.
- Jul 28, 2012
- 11,080
- 10,429
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- QPR, Buffalo Bills
I was going to say something, but i am tired of the rule of the week thingy. Every week they feel the need to pull one out of their arse. You know i wouldn't mind them concentrating on something they rarely do.....like correct disposal?
